CSQ vs IVV
Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CSQ | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.03% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $5.0B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.90% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 816 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +14.08% | +14.50% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.57% | +22.02% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.93% | +21.80% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.46% | +13.37% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -72.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 26, 2004 | May 15, 2000 |
CSQ vs IVV Performance
Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) is a ETF from Calamos Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CSQ returned +21.57% while IVV returned +22.02%. Year to date, CSQ is up 14.08% versus a gain of 14.50% for IVV.
Over three years, CSQ compounded at +20.93% per year against +21.80% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +10.46% and +13.37% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.07% annualized vs +3.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CSQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.3% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -72.7% for CSQ and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CSQ charges 2.03% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $203 vs $3 annually, a gap of $200 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CSQ currently yields 5.90% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
CSQ and IVV share 144 holdings out of 813 unique holdings combined, representing a 54.2% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CSQ or IVV?
CSQ has an expense ratio of 2.03% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $200 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CSQ or IVV?
Over the past year CSQ returned +21.57% vs +22.02% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), CSQ annualized +3.44% vs +7.07% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CSQ or IVV?
CSQ has been the more volatile fund at 20.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: CSQ -72.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both CSQ and IVV?
CSQ and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CSQ and IVV?
CSQ and IVV share 144 common holdings with a 54.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 813 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CSQ or IVV?
CSQ yields 5.90% while IVV yields 1.09%, so CSQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.